Steve Jobs writes: "Imagine a world where every online store sells DRM-free music encoded in open licensable formats. In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players. This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
...then why not at least license FairPlay and/or license other DRM technology from other companies.
Jobs refutes this specifically in the letter - it's completely impractical to license Fairplay, mainly because it exponentially increases the chance for leaks of the DRM code, and makes updating players to fix DRM-breaks incredibly difficult.
Member since:2006-05-29
Member since:2006-12-21
Bull Crap....
Obviously you did not even read the entire article. Not only are the reasons for not licensing FairPlay completely logical, they are also the best route for Apple as a company to avoid any legal actions from the major players who's music they sell. Steve explains the whole position against licensing and I would agree with him, as would most people if they actually sat down and thought about it rationally.
Think about this for a while, now that Apple, and iTunes have a large enough market share to actually mold the industry rather than cow-tow to it, Steve has asked the users to up the ante. iTunes is poised and ready to thrive in a DRM free environment, and has been from the beginning. Who says that they didn't enter the market with a compromise with the intent that once they were big enough they would be able to get the big dogs to listen. Don't forget either that the set price on digital music is something that apple pushed for as well. They picked a battle that they knew they could win, on price, and established a large market based on that price. Now they can and most likely will push to make the music market more free and open.
Member since:2007-01-18
I've thought about it and I think your wrong.
DRM is a tool the record companies wanted I won't dispute that. Apple has used it to lock people into iTunes and the iPod (to which I have no problem with because I love both). What I have a problem with is this BS, and that is what it is, about licensing FairPlay. The simple fact is, in my opinion, that if Apple was to license FairPlay to other portable audio player device manufacturers they could potentially loose iPod sales which for Apple is a big profit maker.
If licensing FairPlay could cause all the problems he says then why did they license it to cell phone companies?
I'm going to close this up by saying that Apple could care less about a DRM free society. DRM isn't hurting them and in fact is helping them.
And lest I forget. Apple keeping the price low is good for Apple. After all who would pay for downloaded music that cost the same as buying a CD from the store. My guess is not many people since sound quality would be degraded (not that I can tell the difference).
The cold hard facts are Apple is a business in it for the money. They do wonderful things with the products they sell and I don't find their prices outrageous. My only point is that believing that Apple is in it for the betterment of mankind is just stupid. Giving the chance Apple would be a worst monopolist than Microsoft.
Member since:
2007-01-18
If he's OK with other players playing his music and he's alright with the iPod playing music from other stores then why not at least license FairPlay and/or license other DRM technology from other companies.
I like iTunes and my iPod and I don't blame any online music store for DRM. However, I don't believe Jobs simply because if he cared to have that kind of free world he would license FairPlay.
I have no problem with Apple and it's products, but this, I have to agree, sounds like cheap publicity.